Before you download the ERC Starting Grant template, you need to confirm your eligibility. The eligibility window runs from 2 to 7 years after your PhD defense date—not your graduation ceremony, not when you received your diploma, but the specific day you successfully defended your thesis. This Horizon Europe proposal template distinction matters more than you might think, and the ERC changed this rule in 2023 precisely because the confusion was causing talented researchers to miss opportunities or submit at the wrong time.
Here's what caught many researchers off guard: if you defended in October 2019 but your university held your formal graduation ceremony in March 2020, the ERC now counts October 2019. That five-month difference could shift your entire ERC Starting Grant eligibility window—potentially making you eligible when you thought you weren't, or vice versa. For researchers transitioning from a postdoc fellowship to independent group leadership, getting this calculation right is essential.
With success rates hovering around 12% and no evidence that waiting until later in your window improves your chances, understanding these ERC eligibility rules isn't just administrative housekeeping. It could determine whether you compete at all—and your academic CV narrative depends on accurate career-stage positioning.
Source: ERC 2025 Starting Grants Results
Official ERC Starting Grant Template and Application Forms
The official ERC Starting Grant template is available through the European Commission's Funding and Tenders Portal. The Horizon Europe proposal template consists of two main sections: Part A (administrative forms completed online) and Part B (scientific proposal, maximum 15 pages including references).
For detailed guidance on crafting each section of your proposal using the ERC template, see our comprehensive ERC Starting Grant Playbook. The template structure has remained relatively consistent since the transition from H2020 to Horizon Europe, though annual updates introduce subtle but important changes. Using the correct year's template is essential—submitting with an outdated version risks administrative rejection before scientific review.
Key Template Components
- Part A: Administrative data, budget, ethical issues, career breaks
- Part B1: Extended synopsis (5 pages max)
- Part B2: CV and track record (5 pages max)
- Early Career Achievement: Highlight your most significant contribution (1 page max)
The 2023 Rule Change That Caught Researchers Off Guard
Before 2023, the ERC used "the date of the PhD award" to calculate eligibility windows. This created genuine unfairness: in some countries, researchers receive their degree certificate within weeks of their viva, while in others, formal graduation ceremonies happen months later—sometimes even the following academic year.
The ERC Scientific Council addressed this by switching to a single, verifiable reference point: the certified date of successful PhD defense. For researchers where no formal defense or viva was organized (as happens in certain doctoral systems), applicants must provide written confirmation from their awarding institution stating no defense occurred and indicating when the PhD was officially approved.
What This Means for 2025 Applications
For researchers with multiple doctorates, the first PhD always counts. If you completed a PhD in literature in 2015 and later earned a second doctorate in neuroscience in 2020, your eligibility window started with the 2015 defense. The ERC explicitly states this rule applies "regardless of field"—a point worth emphasizing if you're considering a career pivot.
Professional Doctorates and MDs: Different Rules Apply
Not all doctoral degrees qualify equally, and this trips up more applicants than you might expect. The ERC distinguishes sharply between research doctorates and first-professional degrees. A JD, MD, PharmD, or similar professional degree carrying the title "Doctor" does not automatically qualify as PhD-equivalent.
The ERC's policy document is unambiguous: "First-professional degrees will not be considered in themselves as PhD-equivalent, even if recipients carry the title 'Doctor.'" This isn't academic gatekeeping—it reflects the distinction between training for professional practice versus training for independent research.
Medical doctors face a more complex eligibility calculation. An MD degree alone won't suffice—applicants need either:
- A separate research PhD, or
- Documented research experience plus an appointment requiring doctoral equivalency (such as a professorship or postdoctoral fellowship)
Key difference: For MDs without a separate PhD, the eligibility window shifts to 4 to 9 years after the medical degree, calculated as MD completion date plus two years.
This creates an important edge case worth noting: medical doctors who hold both MD and PhD degrees should calculate their window from whichever degree makes them eligible earlier. If your MD was in 2014 and your PhD in 2018, the MD + 2 years formula (putting you eligible 2018-2023) might open your window before the PhD date would.
Career Break Extensions: More Generous Than You Think
The ERC offers extensive eligibility extensions that can push your window well beyond seven years. What surprises most applicants: there is no maximum total extension limit. Extensions are additive and can be combined. Only clinical training carries a specific cap of four years.
This matters because life happens. Researchers have children, get sick, care for family members, complete clinical training, serve their countries. The ERC explicitly designed these extensions to ensure diverse career paths don't become funding disadvantages.
Maternity Leave: 18 Months Per Child
The most generous extension: 18 months flat rate per child, whether born before or after your PhD defense. If you can document longer actual leave (maternity plus parental leave combined), the ERC grants the documented amount instead.
Example: A researcher with two children who took documented leaves totaling 40 months would receive a 40-month extension, not the 36-month flat rate. Part-time parental arrangements count proportionally—working 50% for 12 months equals 6 months of extension.
Paternity Leave: Documented Period Only
Unlike maternity leave, there is no flat rate. Extensions match the documented actual leave taken. Fathers must provide employer documentation specifying exact start and end dates.
This asymmetry reflects the reality that parental leave policies vary dramatically across countries. The documented-only approach ensures fairness regardless of national context.
Long-term Illness: 90+ Days
Extensions match the documented leave period, but only for incidents lasting over 90 days (continuous or aggregate for the same condition). This applies to your own illness or caring for a close family member—children, spouse, parents, or siblings.
All illness-based extensions require hospital, doctor, or insurance documentation explaining the long-term nature of the condition.
Clinical Training: Up to 4 Years Maximum
The only capped extension. Extends eligibility for any applicant (not only medical doctors) who completed supervised clinical training after their PhD. Psychologists, physiotherapists, and other health professionals qualify.
Important: Standard hospital doctor service without formal training program status does not qualify. The training must be structured and supervised.
Other Qualifying Extensions
- National/military service: Documented service period
- Major disasters: Geological events, floods, armed conflicts (minimum 90 days inability to work)
- Seeking asylum: From application date until decision or residence permit
- New in 2026: Disability (proportional to reduced working capacity) and gender-based violence (minimum 90 days)
Note: COVID-19 lockdowns alone do not qualify, though COVID-related situations (such as personal illness) might qualify under other extension categories.
Documenting Extensions: What You Actually Need
Extensions must be claimed in Part A of the application form (Section 5 - "Other Questions"). All supporting documentation uploads as a single PDF labeled "Annex 1 - Extension Request," which must include the official ERC template cover page stating the duration requested and explaining the calculation.
Birth certificates, passports, or family books linking mother to children. For claims exceeding 18 months per child, employers must provide signed HR documents certifying exact leave dates.
Always requires employer documentation specifying exact start and end dates—no exceptions.
Both employer certification AND medical documentation from hospitals, doctors, or insurance companies.
Employer (usually hospital) certification specifying training type and exact dates.
The Admissibility and Eligibility Review Committee at ERCEA reviews all extension requests after the deadline. They may request additional information if documentation appears incomplete before making final eligibility determinations. Don't let incomplete paperwork derail an otherwise strong application.
Do Career Break Extensions Signal Weakness?
This concern surfaces repeatedly in researcher forums, and it deserves a direct answer: no. The ERC Scientific Council has addressed this question explicitly and repeatedly.
The official ERC position emphasizes that "the peer review panels will take into account the phase of the Principal Investigator's transition to independence, diverse research career paths and particularly noteworthy contributions to the research community, as well as possible breaks in the research career."
What the ERC Actually Says
Testimony from successful grantees reinforces this. Kinga Kamieniarz-Gdula, an ERC grantee, stated publicly that "the ERC's extension rules for parents were crucial in her consideration of applying for a Starting Grant, as it provided her with an additional three years to apply."
The Scientific Council has described their extension regulations as "generous" and emphasized their commitment to "promoting diversity and work-life balance in science." If you qualify for extensions, claim them without hesitation.
ERC Starting Grant Strategic Timing: The Data on When to Apply
One of the most persistent myths about ERC Starting Grants: waiting until later in your eligibility window improves your chances. The data contradict this belief entirely.
ERC statistics reveal that applicants 4 years post-PhD have the same success rate as those 6-7 years post-PhD. The age distribution of grantees follows a roughly binomial distribution with a median around 35 years. According to the ERC Scientific Council, there is "no evidence whatsoever that older, more senior candidates have a higher acceptance rate."
Applicant behavior reveals something curious: researchers tend to wait, with the modal application coming at 6 years post-PhD. This creates a strategic paradox—applicants delay to build track records when the data suggest no benefit from waiting.
Dr. Athina Anastasaki, who succeeded on her third application, advises: "Apply as quickly as you become eligible and as early as two years from the award of your PhD. And keep applying until you are successful."
The feedback advantage of early application deserves emphasis. Unsuccessful applicants receive panel feedback that substantially improves subsequent applications. Approximately 90% of unsuccessful applicants reapply within four years of their initial attempt. Those who reached Step 2 (the interview stage) but were not funded double their chances on resubmission.
Between 2007 and 2018, over 700 researchers who failed at ERC Starting Grant later won Consolidator Grants. The ERC explicitly designs its feedback to enable improvement. If you're strategically planning your funding timeline, early submission with feedback incorporation beats waiting for a "perfect" first attempt.
Success Rates by Domain and Demographics
Historical success rates have stabilized between 10-15% since Horizon 2020 began. The 2024 call saw 3,474 applications with 494 grants awarded—a 14.2% success rate. Recent years (2022-2024) showed slightly higher rates (13-15%) partly because UK exclusion temporarily reduced application volumes.
The 2025 and 2026 calls show rising applications (+13% and +22.4% respectively), potentially lowering success rates toward 10%. Competition is intensifying.
The ERC allocates budget to each panel proportionally based on requested funding, ensuring comparable success rates across domains.
The gender gap in success rates has been eliminated. During FP7 (2007-2013), women's success rate trailed men's by 3 percentage points (8% versus 11%). Since Horizon 2020, both genders achieve approximately 13% success rates. In 2017, women actually outperformed men (14.5% versus 12.7%). Female applicants comprised 40% of the 2024 applicant pool and 44% of grantees—continuing an upward trend that reached 43% female applicants in 2026, the highest since ERC's 2007 inception.
Host institution country significantly affects grant distribution. Germany consistently leads in absolute numbers (98-99 grants annually), followed by the Netherlands, UK, France, and Italy. But per capita performance tells a different story: the Netherlands achieves 2.8 ERC grants per 1,000 FTE researchers, more than double Germany's 1.2 rate. For researchers considering where to base their application, this disparity suggests institutional culture and support systems matter beyond national research budgets.
Eight ERC Starting Grant Eligibility Mistakes That Derail Applications
These errors appear repeatedly in rejected applications. Most are entirely avoidable with proper preparation.
Using Award Date Instead of Defense Date
The most frequent error since the 2023 rule change. Calculate from your viva, not your graduation ceremony.
Misunderstanding the "First PhD" Rule
Your earliest doctoral defense date determines eligibility, regardless of which field you later pivoted to.
Incorrect Resubmission Assumptions
C grade or B grade at Step 1? You cannot apply the following year. Only Step 2 non-funded applicants may reapply immediately.
Host Institution Confusion
You don't need employment at your proposed host when submitting. The host only needs to commit to engaging you if awarded.
Template Version Errors
The ERC publishes new templates annually with subtle changes. Using last year's version risks administrative rejection.
Scan Quality Problems
All scanned letters must be clearly legible. Blurry support letters have caused otherwise strong applications to fail.
Inconsistent Project Naming
Your title and acronym must match exactly across all documents—B1, B2 headers/footers, and all text references.
Assuming Prestige Helps
"The Host Institution is not a selection criterion; scientific excellence is the sole criterion." Don't seek affiliations you don't need.
What "Independence" Actually Means to ERC Panels
Scientific independence represents the most scrutinized eligibility concept—and the most frequently misunderstood. Dr. Anastasaki's account of her successful third application is instructive: "The ultimate proof of independence (at least in the field of chemistry and materials) is having last author papers, ideally without any of your previous advisors. Anything else can be easily taken down."
The ERC guidelines specify that one paper without your PhD advisor represents the minimum requirement to demonstrate independence. But successful applicants typically show substantially more: corresponding/last author publications, individual fellowships (Marie Curie, national equivalents), independent funding as PI, invited conference talks, journal editorial positions, or single-authored review articles.
What Independence Doesn't Require
- • You need not have your own lab already—"the grant is also meant for young people who are still developing their research group"
- • You need not hold a permanent position
- • You need not be highly accomplished compared to senior researchers—"accomplishments are appreciated in relation to your stage/seniority"
- • Preliminary data helps but isn't mandatory
This connects directly to how you frame your track record. As we discuss in our guide to navigating post-award challenges, independence isn't a binary state—it's a trajectory that panels evaluate relative to your career stage.
The 2027 Window Expansion: Planning Ahead
The ERC Scientific Council has announced the most significant eligibility change since the program's inception. Starting with the 2027 calls, the Starting Grant eligibility window expands from 2-7 years to 0-10 years post-PhD defense. Researchers become eligible immediately upon defending their PhD and remain eligible for a full decade.
Starting Grant
Current: 2-7 years post-PhD
New: 0-10 years post-PhD
Consolidator Grant
Current: 7-12 years post-PhD
New: 5-15 years post-PhD
The Scientific Council explained: "To offer all early-career researchers, whatever their trajectory, the possibility to obtain funding for novel and ambitious ideas, the current eligibility periods had to be adapted."
The new windows create substantial overlap where researchers can choose either grant type. This change recognizes that modern academic careers rarely follow linear trajectories and that the two-year waiting period disadvantaged researchers at institutions without robust startup funding.
For researchers currently calculating their eligibility windows, this creates strategic options. Someone defending in 2024 who would have been ineligible for the 2025 Starting Grant (only one year post-PhD) becomes immediately eligible for the 2027 call under the new 0-10 year window. If you're building your Horizon Europe funding strategy, factor these expanded windows into your planning.
Official Resources and Support
The definitive source for all eligibility rules is the ERC Work Programme document, published annually and available at the European Commission's Funding and Tenders Portal. The 2025 version runs to approximately 100 pages and contains legally binding eligibility criteria.
The Information for Applicants to Starting and Consolidator Grant Calls document provides detailed guidance on documentation requirements, extension calculations, and application procedures. Annex 4.4 specifically addresses PhD reference dates and extension requests.
National Contact Points offer free, personalized support in local languages. Services vary by country but typically include:
- Eligibility verification and window calculation
- Extension documentation guidance
- Interview training and mock panels (e.g., German NCP ERC)
- Proposal review before submission
Find your NCP at horizoneuropencpportal.eu
The Bottom Line: ERC Starting Grant Eligibility Demystified
The ERC Starting Grant eligibility system, while complex, follows clear rules that reward careful planning. The 2023 shift to PhD defense dates standardized eligibility across countries under Horizon Europe. Extension provisions accommodate diverse career paths without penalizing applicants—indeed, the ERC actively encourages researchers to claim applicable extensions and contextualize their track records accordingly in their academic CV.
The strategic implications are counterintuitive: don't wait. Equal success rates across the eligibility window, combined with valuable feedback from unsuccessful attempts, favor early and repeated applications over delayed "perfect" submissions. The upcoming 2027 window expansion to 0-10 years will further reduce timing pressure while increasing competition from newly eligible candidates—including those currently completing their postdoc fellowship positions.
Three Actions That Matter Most
- 1Calculate your defense date precisely—not your award date
- 2Document any applicable extensions thoroughly
- 3Apply early enough to incorporate panel feedback into subsequent attempts
The ERC explicitly designs its Starting Grants for researchers at the beginning of their independent careers. The €1.5 million award and five-year duration exist precisely to help talented scientists build the teams and infrastructure needed for breakthrough research. If you understand the rules, meet the eligibility criteria, and have a compelling scientific vision—you belong in the applicant pool. For guidance on crafting your proposal strategy, see our ERC Starting Grant Playbook, and for the broader context of ERC funding under Horizon Europe, explore our comprehensive ERC grants guide. If you're also considering the next career stage, our guide to the ERC Consolidator Grant can help you plan your long-term funding trajectory. Researchers based in the US may also want to explore early-career funding from the NIH or NSF, which have different but equally complex eligibility criteria.